A New Guiding Framework for Engaging Diverse Populations in Disaster Risk Reduction: Reach, Relevance, Receptiveness, and Relationships

Abstract

In urban environments characterized by rich diversity across language, migration status, demographic profiles, and usage of different forms of media, there can be significant challenges to ensuring that particular disaster risk reduction (DRR) communications reach those potentially affected. This article presents a study with 20 Pacific Island community leaders and connectors about their communities’ perspectives and anticipated responses to natural hazards in Auckland, New Zealand. Home to the largest population of Pacific people in the world, Auckland provides the basis for understanding the complexities of delivering disaster information across numerous community groups. The rich cultural and linguistic backgrounds of multiple Pacific communities living in this city highlight the need to consider the complexities of disaster messaging related to natural hazards. In particular, the article forwards the importance of incorporating the guiding concepts of reach, relevance, receptiveness, and relationships into a DRR approach with culturally and linguistically diverse groups. These concepts are presented as an embedded guiding framework that can helpfully inform disaster communication.

Keywords

Auckland / Community resilience / Disaster communication / Disaster risk reduction / New Zealand / Pacific Island groups / Social capital

References

[1] Aiono-Le Tagaloa F. Tapua’i: Samoan worship, 2003, Apia, Samoa: Malua Printing Press

[2] Aldrich DP. Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery, 2012, Chicago: University of Chicago Press

[3] Auckland Council. 2015. Pacific peoples in Auckland: Results from the 2013 Census. Economic and Social Research and Evaluation Unit. Auckland. http://temp.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz. Accessed 3 Mar 2018.

[4] Auckland Council Translating for a diverse Auckland: A guide to decide how and when to translate, 2017, Auckland: Auckland Council

[5] Barclay J, Haynes K, Mitchell T, Solanda C, Teeuw R, Darnell A, Crosweller HS, Cole P Framing volcanic risk communication within disaster risk reduction: Finding ways for the social and physical sciences to work together. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2008, 305: 163-177

[6] Blake D, Marlowe J, Johnston D. Get prepared: Discourse for the privileged?. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2017, 25: 283-288

[7] Court D, Abbas R. Whose interview is it, anyway? Methodological and ethical challenges of insider–outsider research, multiple languages, and dual-researcher cooperation. Qualitative Inquiry, 2013, 19(6): 480-488

[8] Covello V, Peters R, Wojtecki J, Hyde R. Risk communication, the West Nile virus epidemic, and bioterrorism: Responding to the communication challenges posed by the intentional or unintentional release of a pathogen in an urban setting. Journal of Urban Health, 2001, 78(2): 382-391

[9] Dunsford, D., J. Park, J. Littleton, W. Friesen, P. Herda, P. Neuwelt, J. Hand, P. Blackmore, et al. 2011. Better lives: The struggle for health of transnational Pacific peoples in New Zealand, 1950–2000. Research in Anthropology & Linguistics, Monograph No. 9. Auckland: The University of Auckland.

[10] Eisenman D, Cordasco S, Asch S, Golden J, Glik D. Disaster planning and risk communication with vulnerable communities: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. American Journal of Public Health, 2007, 97(S1): 109-115

[11] Gonzalez-Muzzio, C., and V. Sandoval Henriquez. 2015. Resilient responses from communities and companies after the 2010 Maule earthquake in Chile. UNISDR: A 2015 Report on the Patterns of Disaster Risk Reduction Actions at Local Level. https://www.unisdr.org/campaign/resilientcities/assets/documents/privatepages/Resilient%20responses%20from%20communities%20and%20companies%20after%20in%20Chile.pdf. Accessed 27 Oct 2018.

[12] Guadagno L. Human mobility in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2016, 7(1): 30-40

[13] Infanti J, Sixsmith J, Barry M, Núñez-Córdoba J, Oroviogoicoechea-Ortega C, Guillén-Grima F. A literature review on effective risk communication for the prevention and control of communicable diseases in Europe, 2013, Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)

[14] Kuhlicke, C., and A. Steinführer. 2012. Social capacity building for natural hazards: Toward more resilient societies. Braunschweig, Germany: European Commission. https://cordis.europa.eu/result/rcn/196511_en.html. Accessed 1 July 2018.

[15] Lee H. Lee H, Francis ST. Pacific migration and transnationalism: Historical perspectives. Migration and transnationalism: Pacific perspectives, 2009, Canberra: ANU E Press 7-41

[16] Lilomaiava-Doktor S. Lee H, Francis ST. Samoan transnationalism: Cultivating “home” and “reach”. Migration and transnationalism: Pacific perspectives, 2009, Canberra: ANU E Press 57-71.

[17] Luna F. Elucidating the concept of vulnerability: Layers not labels. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 2009, 2(1): 121-139

[18] Macpherson C, Macpherson L. Lee H, Francis ST. Kinship and transnationalism. Migration and transnationalism: Pacific perspectives, 2009, Canberra: ANU E Press 73-90.

[19] Marlowe J. Belonging and disaster recovery: Refugee background communities and the Canterbury Earthquakes. British Journal of Social Work, 2015, 45(S1): 188-204

[20] Marlowe J, Bogen R. Young people from refugee backgrounds as a resource for disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015, 14(2): 125-131

[21] Masaki, H.T. 2015. Exploring climate change, gender and transnationalism: Perspectives of Pacific women in Auckland. M.A. thesis, Development Studies, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.

[22] Mathbor G. Enhancement of community preparedness for natural disasters. International Social Work, 2007, 50(3): 357-369

[23] Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management. 2018. “The 4Rs”. https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/cdem-framework/the-4rs/. Accessed 12 May 2018.

[24] NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2018. U.S. billion-dollar weather and climate disasters: Overview. NOAA. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/. Accessed 8 Nov 2018.

[25] Putnam R. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community, 2000, London: Simon & Schuster

[26] Reynolds M. Relating to Va: Re-viewing the concept of relationships in Pasifika education in Aotearoa New Zealand. AlterNative: An International Journal for Indigenous Peoples, 2016, 12(2): 190-202

[27] Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 2009, London: Sage

[28] Shepherd J, van Vuuren K. The Brisbane Flood: CALD gatekeepers risk communication role. Disaster Prevention and Management, 2014, 23(4): 469-483

[29] Stats NZ. 2018. 2013 Census. http://archive.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census.aspx. Accessed 28 June 2018.

[30] Tierney K. The social roots of risk: Producing disasters, promoting resilience, 2014, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press

[31] Vertovec S. Super-diversity and its implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2007, 30(6): 1024-1054

[32] Wylie S. Best practice guidelines: Engaging with culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities in times of disaster, 2012, Christchurch, NZ: Community Language Information Network Group (CLING)